Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 367

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Open access
Chan, Paul S., Patel, Manesh R., Klein, Lloyd W., Krone, Ronald J., Dehmer, Gregory J., Kennedy, Kevin, Nallamothu, Brahmajee K., Weaver, W. Douglas, Masoudi, Frederick A., Rumsfeld, John S., Brindis, Ralph G., Spertus, John A.·2011·JAMA

Abstract

CONTEXT: Despite the widespread use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the appropriateness of these procedures in contemporary practice is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To assess the appropriateness of PCI in the United States. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Multicenter, prospective study of patients within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry undergoing PCI between July 1, 2009, and September 30, 2010, at 1091 US hospitals. The appropriateness of PCI was adjudicated using the appropriate use criteria for coronary revascularization. Results were stratified by whether the procedure was performed for an acute (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, or unstable angina with high-risk features) or nonacute indication. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of acute and nonacute PCIs classified as appropriate, uncertain, or inappropriate; extent of hospital-level variation in inappropriate procedures. RESULTS: Of 500,154 PCIs, 355,417 (71.1%) were for acute indications (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 103,245 [20.6%]; non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 105,708 [21.1%]; high-risk unstable angina, 146,464 [29.3%]), and 144,737 (28.9%) for nonacute indications. For acute indications, 350,469 PCIs (98.6%) were classified as appropriate, 1055 (0.3%) as uncertain, and 3893 (1.1%) as inappropriate. For nonacute indications, 72,911 PCIs (50.4%) were classified as appropriate, 54,988 (38.0%) as uncertain, and 16,838 (11.6%) as inappropriate. The majority of inappropriate PCIs for nonacute indications were performed in patients with no angina (53.8%), low-risk ischemia on noninvasive stress testing (71.6%), or suboptimal (≤1 medication) antianginal therapy (95.8%). Furthermore, although variation in the proportion of inappropriate PCI across hospitals was minimal for acute procedures, there was substantial hospital variation for nonacute procedures (median hospital rate for inappropriate PCI, 10.8%; interquartile range, 6.0%-16.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In this large contemporary US cohort, nearly all acute PCIs were classified as appropriate. For nonacute indications, however, 12% were classified as inappropriate, with substantial variation across hospitals.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.2011.916

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

See all 367

Metadata

Authors
Chan, P. S., Patel, M. R., Klein, L. W., Krone, R. J., Dehmer, G. J., Kennedy, K., Nallamothu, B. K., Weaver, W. D., Masoudi, F. A., Rumsfeld, J. S., Brindis, R. G., & Spertus, J. A.
Venue
JAMA
Published
2011-07-06
Volume
306
Issue
1
Pages
53-61
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2023310736
Cited by
367
References
2
FWCI
56.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2011.916
The paper
Chan, P. S., Patel, M. R., Klein, L. W., Krone, R. J., Dehmer, G. J., Kennedy, K., Nallamothu, B. K., Weaver, W. D., Masoudi, F. A., Rumsfeld, J. S., Brindis, R. G., & Spertus, J. A. (2011). Appropriateness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.916

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.